(July 23, 2023 at 4:06 pm)Anomalocaris Wrote: Most facts are unknown to most people, most people think ill informed intuition further tainted by irrational fears and undisciplined desires has any value in arriving at understanding of reality. so what most people think is irrelevant.
You're here trying to gaslight theists that they're not acquainted with the world enough, whereas, in reality, the majority of the "world" does believe in an afterlife, and in hell in particular, independently of whether an afterlife really exists or not.
And not all religious people believe in an afterlife because of fear, many sophisticated theists do have good epistemic reasons to believe in it. In particular, accepting the premise that God -as traditionally conceived- exists directly implies that an afterlife exists. Otherwise, the problem of evil is insoluble, because it would violate the accepted premise -that a benevolent God exists (all theodicies rely on some form of an afterlife, once you take it away, no theodicy is possible)
(July 23, 2023 at 4:16 pm)Astreja Wrote: Terrible example, LD. If someone commits premeditated murder, I'm fine with them facing life imprisonment - losing the enjoyment of the rest of their own life as punishment for the life that they destroyed. I'm not okay with bringing them back to life after their death, and subjecting them to torture.
Do you have any specific criterion for being okay or not okay with different forms of punishments -besides your subjective views about the world? And if someone commits premeditated murder and gets away with it, are you okay with them being brought back to life after death and face justice, would that suit your personal tastes?
And apparently, theists value life more than you do. Life imprisonment isn't enough to redress the injustice of murder, life is infinitely valuable. The death penalty is the minimal form of justice when it comes to murder, and it would still not be enough because the victim usually would have suffered more than the murderer.
(July 23, 2023 at 4:28 pm)Bucky Ball Wrote: Obviously they made up the Hadith, and forgot about the calendar change.
Assuming the calendar change did happen and led to an error in dating the exact year of the prophet's death, this would still mean nothing, absolutely nothing -besides that someone made a mistake, that's it. That a Muslim scholar made a mistake means that he made a mistake, not that Islam is wrong, or that Muhammad didn't exist, or that the hadiths are fake. I'm not sure where you're driving at with all this gibberish.
Apparently you need a refresher on Islam 101, it's common knowledge that there are many thousands of made up hadiths, Muslim scholars knew that for more than 1400 years, that's why they extensively studied the narrators of the hadiths and how reliable they are. After centuries of work, they collected the most authentic ones in books known as Sahihs', we have many of them today, the most notorious and reliable are known as Kutub al-Sittah (the six books)
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kutub_al-Sittah.
Among these six books we find Sahih Al-Bukhari, probably the most famous text in Islam after the Qur'an, which collects thousands of authentic sayings of the Islamic prophet.
Meanwhile, you're sitting comfortably on your sofa, waving the middle finger at centuries upon centuries of scholarly work on the hadiths, stupidly copying and pasting all kinds of garbage from christian websites that pretend they destroyed Islam, and from notorious islamophobic journalists like Spencer, and you still have no problem claiming, with a straight face, that the entirety of hadith is made up. You can do better, y'know ?
